From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

STARKIE v. NIB CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 1, 1932
235 App. Div. 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 1932)

Opinion

February, 1932.


Order reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted. Civil Practice Act, section 120, did not authorize the filing of a lis pendens. No claim is made in the complaint against the property of the defendant. ( Ackerman v. True, 44 App. Div. 106; McManus v. Weinstein, 108 id. 301.) Lazansky, P.J., Young, Carswell, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.

Amd. by Laws of 1929, chap. 337. — [REP.


Summaries of

STARKIE v. NIB CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 1, 1932
235 App. Div. 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 1932)
Case details for

STARKIE v. NIB CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION

Case Details

Full title:MAY STARKIE and FREDERICK W. STARKIE, Respondents, v. NIB CONSTRUCTION…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Feb 1, 1932

Citations

235 App. Div. 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 1932)

Citing Cases

Schlaifer v. Shelby-Coleridge

David Friedman for defendant. Gerlich & Powers for plaintiffs. EAGER, J. This is a motion by the defendant to…

Schlaifer v. Shelby-Coleridge

The question on this motion, therefore, is does the complaint state a cause of action "affecting the title…